Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    April 10, 2013 6:00pm-6:30pm PDT

6:00 pm
denial of a permit to alter a building with new gate and a curb cut. and there's a rear yard variance and off street parking pad located on the open rear yard and i think we're about to hear why i'm not supposed to read all of that >> the appellants expressed their certain and with the boards agreement we would like to schedule this item to allow them to prepare an additional plan we could consider if that's the boards pleasure.
6:01 pm
>> and is there someone here from the appellant to speak to that as well? >> good evening i'm the appellant project owner and we seek a continuance to a date that's to the commissions preference. >> do you have a sense of how much time you need? >> we need a couple of weeks to do our plans and they need to be submitted. >> madam chair the earliest would be may 22. >> how is the scheduling of next week's hearing going to play out? >> , right? i would expect that the next couple of meetings
6:02 pm
would be heavy. people have wait to be heard >> how about may first? and a how about may 22? >> i'm saying have an additional meeting on may 1st? >> no. >> have another meeting on may 1st? maybe we can decide that another time by i like may 22. >> may 22 and is that for both items? t the other items as well. any public comment on this? okay seeing none move to continue to may 22nd for the party to resubmit and reanalyze
6:03 pm
the requests. - for the variance >> would you expect the matters to be heard or be withdrawn? >> i believe the board would have to have the - >> would an additional briefing be neat. >> an additional revised plan perhaps and is that okay with the board? >> we have a motion then from the president to reschedule both appeals v-13 dash 007 to may 22,
6:04 pm
2013, additional briefing is loud and this is for sub military for any revised plans. (calling roll) >> the vote is 4 to zero those matters are rescheduled to may 22nd. thank you. >> then move on to appeal item 8 mick oil wrirth the subject property is known as 260 to 260 destreet and regarding allegations that the property is being used in violation of the
6:05 pm
planning code. we'll start with the appellant >> thank you so much. i was >> state your name please and my name is nicole. >> i did look on line for reasonable appropriate delays so i did bring hospital reports i've been on disability and been brutally attacked twice i've been on disability. i managed to pull everything together. these are all factual legal documents so show this case is
6:06 pm
erroneous >> you were on bed rest and a couple of months later there was an attack. >> i believe there was a brief from your landlord. >> so your requesting to do a submission and have a hearing another day and a okay. yeah. these are the factors you guys need to review them first; right? >> i'd like to review any actual submission. by your stating our reason for not submitting that is because you were physically unable too? >> yes and i think we should
6:07 pm
have a continuance to be able to review your submission. that would be your >> unless the district attorney disagrees. >> so no disagreement? >> her landlord is a party to this appeal. >> i'm thomas. >> please step up to the microphone. >> i'm the attorney for the landlord we submit the brief the facts in the brief are essentially our presentation there's new facts that arose here. >> would you have an objection to a continuance?
6:08 pm
>> no. >> so do we need public comment or anything like that? >> is there any public comment on this item with respect to the possible continuance? >> i'd like to make the motion to continue this matter to allow the commissioners an opportunity to review the written submission by the appellant. >> thank you. >> commissioner i wonder if you want to give the zoning commissioner leave to submit a brief although he had an opportunity he may wish to in the future. >> and also the timing of the landlord submission is at the same time? >> at the same time of the va.
6:09 pm
>> so a response i would allow an opportunity for 0 o a submission. >> one thursday prior. >> and i would suggest may 22? i want to let you know to have a presentation that evening. that's a 15 minute item >> which presentation? >> on the soft story item. but it still would be a viable evening >> june 5th. >> june 5th. is that okay with the parties? would that be acceptable? >> wednesday. and is it 5:00 p.m.? >> that is always the same as
6:10 pm
well. >> may i ask two questions? >> so one all of these contracts and factual documents are actually enough documents for the planning department to dismiss the case a? >> upon receipt of our submission if there's a different view of the zoning administrator then they'll advice us of that. >> my second question is that my neighborhoods has been harris me and say also a person in the attempting murder of me is there a way to prevent her from
6:11 pm
harassings me. >> i would suggest you can request a zoning hearing. >> it means that i'm - >> oh, hi. >> the ability to request the va hearing has passed this was afford when at the time of february 5th at the time they could have appealed it but they appealed it tosto this board. >> so that opportunity has passed. >> you can call us tomorrow. >> well assuming the motion passes. >> okay. i, have is a seat. >> so we have is a motion on the floor from the president to
6:12 pm
reschedule this matter to june 5th, 2013, the briefing schedule is restated and the property owner has a chance to present a response same thing as our northwest schedule. and on that motion (calling names) >> the vote is 4 to zero this matter is rescheduled to may 5th with a new briefing schedule. >> i will call the next item appeal number 13 dash 003 greg hovlt man vs. the department.
6:13 pm
protesting the issuance of january 13th to jeff to erect a building a commercial residential believe with 3 thousand 4 hundred and 3 square feet of ground floor area. and we will cabin with the appellant. >> you have 7 minutes. >> frankly i didn't plan to speak for 7 minutes. i sent everyone a letter i don't know if you folks read the letters i'm sure you get leave
6:14 pm
letters. we've been in a number of neighborhood meetings i have about 10 e-mails from today. i was in china too dies ago myself we're all tired of protesting this he development. there were a few outside an hour and a half they left. you have a couple of letters from us. i was a real estate developer a few years ago. >> too. years here i think. >> i own a real estate company for what it's worth.
6:15 pm
i own a fruit pirate company now. so we're neighbors. we've tried to talk with the developer and his architect and we've tried to ask i am for one ail the documents talk about a one-story building it's actually a four story building. it was explained to me under the business code it's a retail floor so there is a 4 story building being built there although all the documentation says a 3 story building. we want to make sure that the planning commission may have missed. we didn't think a lot of our points were heard. i tried to put them in the letter. there are four buildings on our
6:16 pm
street they'll lose their sunlight. we ask the building to more conform to the left there's a cafe i'm sure you're familiar with it. i develop a lot of development in this town. when i had a 40 foot height limit and you have retail at 10 to 11 square feet you have only enough space for a 3 story building. so in our minds it sets a precedent for a four story building on our street which we don't like. ail we asked was to shave couple
6:17 pm
of feet off the top floor. there are parking areas that will be problems. the builder parks on that street and i told the neighbors i'd do the best i could to bring their case to this board. this building plus the 9 foot penalty buildings will be an eye soar but to the people inform the immediate east of the building all of the sunlight will be off the backyards there. nobody really cares were we asked the planning department why there's no parking requirement here since there's a
6:18 pm
imply large building being built. we're have famous with the developer. he sorry to be - trying to be covering outline those issues there was a sub let scooter in town and they show the scooters there go up and down the street they pollutant your neighborhood. the parking is obstructed by the van. so there's been a lot of contention between the neighbors and we were pope hoping for the developer not to push the
6:19 pm
height. put two units of residential they say they want to live there. every neighbor is against this project. there's no neighbor that's in favor of this project. the developer grew up in the city he brought friends from all over the city and said our neighborhood needed this project. we're all in the hope he will reconsider and build a 3 story building. lower the height by 3 feet or so and set a precedent by 3 feet and maybe give a little bit more light back to the neighbors and call it a day. we've got a vertical who wants to put 2 penalty houses on top
6:20 pm
of the building and it really sticks out. i've lived there since 1985. i live around the corner. does that mean i'm done? you know, it doesn't conform to any building open the street the one side is there's a two-story building but even from the front of that it looks like two stories. i built renaissance and this doesn't fit >> thank you.
6:21 pm
>> good evening on behalf of the project sponsor. we're excited to show you a project which is a unique opportunity to approve the operation of the surrounding sidewalks. i've been involved in the fisherman's wharf in the many years. i want to start by first having the project sponsor come up here and give you some more information on this project >> again evening i'm jeff and this is my wife.
6:22 pm
we're the sponsors of the project. in 2008 i attended neighborhood meetings and planning commissioner hearings from a meeting. at both the neighborhood hearing i heard what the neighborhood concerns were. when lying my wife were able to purchase the property we deliberately included many of the neighbors concerns and issues when designing our project. we have had several meetings with the neighbors. most of our neighbors like the chances. we've made several concessions and in order to be good neighbors and have a viable project. my wife and you are employees
6:23 pm
and we've worked very hard to grow our business over the last thirty years. we need this space to continue our growth. please uphold the planning commissions decision this is a great project that will comfortable the aesthetics to the neighborhood. i want to say we're not developers we're just a couple that have worked hard over the last 31 years. we've raised our children here and we decided we wanted to move into the three neighborhood and continue our work. we really feel we've made an effort, you know, to make a good
6:24 pm
project and i truly believe that most neighbors are heap with it. thank you >> thank you commissioners. so i'd like to first emphasize the length they went into. the project was first started by a developer who want to have a 5 foot story building. jeff you listened to ail the public comment and when he purchased the project he meet with the developers and wanted to know how to respond to the neighbors issues. they provided he'll parking eliminating the need for any
6:25 pm
curb cut and they've updated the design. they held a number of meetings with the neighbors and after those meetings they further reduced the bulk of the building they put the penthouse inside the building and they tried to provide a better fire proof ceiling and at one point be responsive to the neighborhood. they further reduced the bulk on the east side of the project to better provided sunlight to the buildings in the area. i would like to do add a document to the record. it's a e-mail from jean who has
6:26 pm
the first building up on hide street. we want air and sunlight to reap their property. steve brought to our office this final approved plan and your improvements are greatly appreciated. so that's there. even though not all the neighbors have found this to those a good project it's not the tall it or the most massive building open the street. while they've done their best to fit into the neighborhood it has
6:27 pm
a 10 to 12 foot ground floor ours is 11 feet. the back space will allow them to have their administrative operation. the bikes will now be transferred between the buildings and also endanger and recycling will be taken place removing it from the beach front sidewalk which is used heavy by tourists. the proximately will allow them to grow their san francisco business. we urge the planning christmas approve that plan unanimously a year ago. i want to briefly say that the
6:28 pm
previous building code which was what this building was analyzed under we've got other documents that describe this in a positive way. >> do you want to accept that document into the record? >> can i ask you a question? i'd like to hear a little bit more of the impact on the properties the shadow and light. >> sure. >> maybe i missed it but did you do a shadow test? >> so we didn't do a shadow study. and looking at this this is a one story 5 foot building for
6:29 pm
the foreseeable past. one of the exhibits we introduced with this is exhibit c shows you an outline of the hide streets = vocations. there's a number of things to reduce the impact of those heights. a rear yard is >> could you put it on the overhead so i can track what you're saying. >> i don't know if that's legible. >> what's the page number? >> exhibit c. >> thank you. >> so there's a handful of aspects of the project that have been incorporated to reduce the impact. again, you see the rear yard it's adjacent to the rear


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on